Get documents about "Adaptive Management for Decision Making at the Program and
W
Shared by: pitbull99
Categories
Tags
adaptive management, decision making, management actions, monitoring program, management objectives, management decisions, adaptive management program, resource management, decision makers, fish and wildlife, management strategies, natural resource management, goals and objectives, adaptive approach, conservation projects
-
Stats
- views:
- 20
- posted:
- 11/9/2009
- language:
- English
- pages:
- 11
Document Sample
PNNL-18261
Adaptive Management for Decision
Making at the Program and Project
Levels of the Missouri River
Recovery Program
RM Thom D Tyre
MG Anderson CA Fleming
February 2009
DISCLAIMER
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the
United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency
thereof, nor Battelle Memorial Institute, nor any of their employees, makes any
warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility
for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus,
product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe
privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product,
process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not
necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by
the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial
Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily
state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.
PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORY
operated by
BATTELLE
for the
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
under Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830
Printed in the United States of America
Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the
Office of Scientific and Technical Information,
P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0062;
ph: (865) 576-8401
fax: (865) 576-5728
email: reports@adonis.osti.gov
Available to the public from the National Technical Information Service,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield, VA 22161
ph: (800) 553-6847
fax: (703) 605-6900
email: orders@ntis.fedworld.gov
online ordering: http://www.ntis.gov/ordering.htm
This document was printed on recycled paper.
(9/2003)
PNNL-18261
Adaptive Management for Decision
Making at the Program and Project
Levels of the Missouri River Recovery
Program
RM Thoma D Tyreb
MG Andersona CA Flemingc
a PacificNorthwest National Laboratory
b Universityof Nebraska-Lincoln
c U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District
February 2009
Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy
under Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
Richland, Washington 99352
February 2009
ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT FOR DECISION MAKING AT THE PROGRAM
AND PROJECT LEVELS OF THE MISSOURI RIVER RECOVERY PROGRAM
Prepared by Ronald Thom (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory [PNNL]), Michael Anderson (PNNL), Andrew Tyre
(University of Nebraska-Lincoln), and Craig Fleming (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District)
strategy for implementing adaptive
Introduction management within the program; we finish with
The paper, “Adaptive Management: an example of AM in action within Phase I of
Background for Stakeholders in the Missouri the MRPP.
River Recovery Program,” introduced the
The Missouri River Recovery Program
concept of adaptive management (AM), its
principles and how they relate to one-another, The MRRP consists of activities to restore
how AM is applied, and challenges for its some of the natural form and function of the
implementation. This companion paper Missouri River ecosystem to recover the three
describes how the AM principles were applied listed species—Pallid sturgeon
to specific management actions within the (Scaphirhynchus albus), Interior least tern
Missouri River Recovery Program to facilitate (Sterna antillarum), and Piping plover
understanding, decision-making, and (Charadrius melodus)—while providing for
stakeholder engagement. For context, we current social and economic values. This effort
begin with a brief synopsis of the Missouri will take decades to accomplish and will
River Recovery Program (MRRP) and the require more than just the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps)
and the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) to
succeed. The
recovery program
stands on four
foundational pillars:
habitat creation,
flow modifications,
science, and public
involvement.
The Corps and
USFWS have
committed to using
AM as the
management tool of
choice in executing
Shallow water habitat chute. Photo: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
2 Adaptive Management for Decision Making at the Program and Project Levels of the Missouri River Recovery Program
Flow modification. Photo: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
the MRRP. AM includes stakeholders and Statement. AM principles will be incorporated
others in the process of addressing the into the development and implementation of
uncertainties that exist (scientific, social, and the plan.
economic) in restoration actions on a large The two program phases are very different in
system. make-up and purpose and require some further
explanation:
The adaptive management strategy for the
MRRP consists of two phases. Phase I is Phase I is the starting place for MRRP
focused on applying AM principles to ongoing actions that are already underway within
management actions (Biological Opinion and the Corps. Phase I starts with Biological
Mitigation Program activities) in the near term Opinion actions (under the Reasonable and
(5 to 15 years) to improve their ability to meet Prudent Alternative or RPA). These are
program goals and objectives. Phase II is a actions described in the Biological Opinion
long-term planning process focused on the by the USFWS that are likely to help the
entire Missouri River system to develop future Corps avoid jeopardy. Jeopardy actions
strategies for the Missouri River through a are very different from recovery actions in
collaborative planning process developed that avoiding jeopardy means not making
under the Missouri River Ecosystem things worse than they currently are. So,
Restoration Plan and Environmental Impact Phase I starts with RPA actions (which are
focused on removing jeopardy) and will
Adaptive Management for Decision Making at the Program and Project Levels of the Missouri River Recovery Program 3
seek to learn from these actions to move terns (these birds forage for small fishes in
towards recovery by improving them and SWHs.). The RPA also includes the creation
adding to them as information and of Emergent Sandbar Habitat (ESH) for Piping
collaboration warrants. plover and Interior least tern forage and
Phase II, on the other hand, will be about nesting habitat.
recovery. Through the collaborative
Phase I Adaptive Management in the
planning process, assessment of existing
Missouri River Recovery Program
information (including information gathered
and/or learned during Phase I) will be used Phase I of the MRRP applies structured
to craft alternatives that can truly achieve decision making to existing activities. The
recovery of the listed species, while also Corps and the Fish and Wildlife Service
providing for other interests of the system. participated in Rapid Prototyping Workshops
with teams of interagency/interdisciplinary
We will combat many important subtleties
people to develop goals, objectives, and
within those statements throughout both
models necessary to predict consequences of
phases of this program. For now, it is
the management actions being implemented.
important to know that the phases are different
The models improve our ability to meet
and why. The remainder of this paper focuses
program objectives and the individual program
on Phase I AM.
goals. So far, we have engaged in Phase I in
The Biological Opinion1 (amended in 2003) one area: habitat creation; other RPA elements
contained RPA elements that would help avoid will be addressed as time and needs dictate.
further negative impacts to the listed species. Developing and implementing an adaptive
One element, habitat creation (along with strategy for an action requires working with
habitat restoration), is a principal mechanism technical workgroups, the Cooperation for
for recovering populations of threatened and Recovery (CORE) team, stakeholders in the
endangered species.1 As one of the four pillars Missouri River Recovery Implementation
of the MRRP, habitat creation is focused on Committee (MRRIC), and monitoring teams.
recovery of species through the creation of the
habitats upon which they rely. The RPA
includes Shallow Water Habitat (SWH) creation
activities for Pallid sturgeon and Interior least
Juvenile Pallid sturgeon. Photo: U.S. Army Corps of Nesting Interior least tern. Photo: U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers Engineers
4 Adaptive Management for Decision Making at the Program and Project Levels of the Missouri River Recovery Program
Pilot Projects with the Missouri River when habitat is required by the birds.
Recovery Program Construction of the habitat commences during
Two pilot projects have been initiated under the a short period of the year when the birds are
MRRP. absent and when icy conditions do not restrict
work. Bird populations typically use ESH
Shallow Water Habitat Program between mid-April and August. The USFWS
has established sandbar acreage goals to be
One primary RPA goal is to provide sufficient
achieved by 2015 in four sections of the river,
habitat throughout the lower Missouri River to
including stretches below Garrison Dam, Fort
support self-sustaining populations of Pallid
Randall Dam, Gavins Point Dam, and Lewis
sturgeon by creating 20 to 30 acres per mile of
and Clark Lake.4
SWH below Gavins Point Dam.1 Strategies for
creating SWH include widening the main Both the SWH and ESH programs are being
channel (increasing top width), creating side guided by a suite of comprehensive research
channel chutes, modifying existing habitat, and monitoring programs conducted by
altering summer river flow, or using a numerous agencies. The science process is
combination of the above. SWH is naturally guided by engineers and scientists to help
created through two means: 1) erosion of the understand the complex ecosystem and how
high banks, and 2) erosion and deposition system components work together. Numerous
converting terrestrial acres into aquatic habitat. uncertainties remain, but the AM plans will
Widening of channels and construction of ultimately inform the decision-making process
chutes requires excavation of bank material as new information is gathered over time and
and/or modification of the configuration of rock studied collectively among programs.
and piling structures of the Bank Stabilization
and Navigation Project. After these physical
actions, the river is expected to erode the high
banks to complete the SWH creation process.
Currently, two methods have been used under
the MRRP: 1) construction of habitat that is
immediately usable by the species, and
2) alteration of existing habitat to promote
sedimentation.2
Emergent Sandbar Habitat Program
The Emergent Sandbar Habitat (ESH) Program
is a project-level effort designed to improve the
outcome of management actions implemented
in response to the Biological Opinion on two
avian species listed under the Endangered
Species Act: the Interior least tern and the
Piping plover. Sandbars are being created by
building (bulldozing or dredging) new emergent
sandbar island habitat, mechanically clearing
vegetation from existing sandbars, or by being
exposed by adjusting river flow at critical times Habitat protection. Photo: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Adaptive Management for Decision Making at the Program and Project Levels of the Missouri River Recovery Program 5
Applying Adaptive Management in the The SDM steps helped organize the
Missouri River Recovery Program understanding of the interactions and the
importance of many of the uncertainties and
As was presented in the first paper, an AM
focus decision-making on key types of
process helps attain program goals in an
information. Some of the products of the SDM
efficient and cost-effective manner. Rather
workshop were drafts of simple numerical
than using trial and error, the MRRP is actively
models that can be used to predict the benefit
investigating and directing actions based on
of the SWH creation alternatives to sturgeon.
the analysis of information that is critical to
The models and other SDM tools are meant to
making decisions about what should be
guide decision-making that maximizes the
implemented. The work to date on this
benefit realized from the MRRP. Uncertainties
process for SWH is summarized here. Work
remain about how well the alternative actions
on ESH has followed a similar path.
will work to produce the expected result in
History of the Process to Develop an Adaptive habitat that provides the maximum benefit to
Management Strategy for Shallow Water the sturgeon population. The uncertainties are
Habitat associated with the physical outcomes of
actions as well as the biological connections
To begin developing an AM strategy for SWH,
between the actions and the fish.
a Structured Decision Making Rapid Prototype
workshop was held. The goal of the workshop Program actions taken over the past several
was to develop a prototype of a SWH decision years are starting to yield information that is
that would help us see the utility of Structured critical to the advancement of the MRRP. As
Decision Making (SDM) for our efforts. Once an example, the Habitat Assessment and
that value was realize we worked to expand Monitoring Program (HAMP), and the Pallid
the prototype into an AM plan to guide Sturgeon Population Assessment Program, as
implementation of the SWH creation actions, well as other survey and modeling efforts, are
monitoring, analyses, and reporting. The SDM supplying data that directly relate to how well
approach enables formal evaluation of a various physical actions are working. The
complex decision to ensure that all aspects are HAMP was established to assess the effects of
considered.3 Adaptive management is a SWH creation on habitat development and
special case of SDM that arises when the fishes occupying the river by studying certain
decisions are iterative; that is, the sections of the river before and after actions
consequences of future decisions depend on were taken, as well as sections where no
the outcomes of past decisions. The set of action was taken. Supplemental to the HAMP
simple steps addressed at the workshop are as data, the Pallid Sturgeon Population
follows: Assessment Program will provide the
Define the problem. benchmark for determining whether the
Describe the objectives. population is recovering. Taken together, the
HAMP and population assessment activities,
List the possible actions.
coupled with monitoring of what actions
Predict the consequences of those actions produced the greatest physical changes in the
in terms of the objectives. area of SWH, will inform future decisions about
Examine the tradeoffs among the objectives the most efficient and effective means for
to select the best action. recovering the species.
6 Adaptive Management for Decision Making at the Program and Project Levels of the Missouri River Recovery Program
Stakeholder involvement. Photo: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Stakeholder Engagement and if not, what is being done to rectify the
As described in the DOI Technical Guide on situation is critical to the success of the MRRP.
AM, stakeholders are critical to successful
Conclusion
progress in AM. Stakeholders must be involved
in the process of reviewing MRRP progress The complexity and incomplete understanding
and advising decision-makers. The Missouri of the Missouri River ecosystem drives the
River Implementation Committee is looked to application of the AM principles as described in
as the primary source for stakeholder “Adaptive Management: Background for
engagement within the MRRP. The Stakeholders in the Missouri River Recovery
Cooperating for Recovery (CORE) team is Program,” which are helping to shape AM
responsible for major decisions regarding plans for both the SWH and ESH programs.
implementation of the MRRP. Engineers These plans, along with on-the-ground
implement creation actions and scientists research and monitoring activities, will help
monitor and report on the relevant results ensure that decisions are based on the best
required by the CORE team to make decisions. available science and those efforts to recover
The addition of stakeholder participation in native species move toward the MRRP goal of
reviewing the results of the program, asking “A sustainable ecosystem supporting thriving
whether the program is truly meeting its goals, populations of native species while providing
for current social and economic values.”
Adaptive Management for Decision Making at the Program and Project Levels of the Missouri River Recovery Program 7
2
References Staroska, A, C Ridenour, C Wrasse, W Doyle,
and T Hill. 2008. Pallid Sturgeon Habitat
1
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2000. Assessment and Monitoring Program 2007
Biological Opinion on the Operation of the Annual Report: Segments 10, 13, and 14.
Missouri River Main Stem Reservoir System, United States Fish and Wildlife Service,
Operation and Maintenance of the Missouri Columbia National Fish and Wildlife
River Bank Stabilization and Navigation Conservation Office, Columbia, Missouri.
Project, and Operation of the Kansas River
3
Reservoir System. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Gregory, RS and RL Keeney. 2002. “Making
Service, Fort Snelling, Minnesota. smarter environmental management
decisions.” Journal of the American Water
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2003. 2003 Resources Association 38(6):1601-1612.
Amendment to the 2000 Biological Opinion on
4
the Operation of the Missouri River Main Stem Missouri River Recovery Program. 2007.
Reservoir System, Operation and Maintenance Emergent Sandbar Habitat (ESH). Available
of the Missouri River Bank Stabilization and URL:
Navigation Project, http://www.moriverrecovery.org/mrrp/f?p=136:1
and Operation of the Kansas River Reservoir 32:1941169279106105::NO:::. (Accessed
System. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Fort February 5, 2009 )
Snelling, Minnesota.
Missouri River sunset. Photo: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Related docs
